MOPPE RAMA DEVI v. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH
Case at a glance
Outcome
Dismissed
petitioner, the Writ Petition is dismissed as infructuous
Provisions considered
- Constitution of India art. 226
- Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 s. 151
Key paragraphs
- Para 22. Considering the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner, the Writ Petition is dismissed as infructuous.
Judgment
Cause title
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE BATTU DEVANAND
WRIT PETITION NO: 7894/2017 Between:
1. MOPPE RAMA DEVI,, W/O. GOPI AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS, OCC: CULTIVATION R/O. D. NO. 19-8-136, SBI COLONY, R.C. ROAD TIRUPATHI, CHITTOOR DISTRICT ...PETITIONER
AND
1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, HOME DEPARTMENT SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT
2. THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, KOTA POLICE STATION KOTA, SPSR NELLORE DISTRICT, NELLORE
3. BHOOMPALLI RADHA KRISHNA REDDY, S/O. CHINNA DESI REDDY AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, R/O. GUDALI VILLAGE KOTA MANDAL, SPSR NELLORE DISTRICT
4. BHOOMPALLI VENKATA REDDY, S/O. CHINNA DESI REDDY AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, R/O. GUDALI VILLAGE KOTA MANDAL, SPSR NELLORE DISTRICT ...RESPONDENT(S)
: Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased toto issue an appropriate order or direction more particularly, one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 2nd respondent in not conducting investigation of Crime No. 121/2015 dated 30.08.2015 is illegal, arbitrary, irresponsible, high-handed, non exercising powers vested with, against to the principles of natural justice and violative of fundamental right guaranteed under Article 14 of India and consequentially direct the respondent conduct investigation and file charge sheet against the respondents 3 86 4 forthwith in the interest of justice the Constitution of IA NO: 1 OF 2017(WPMP 9735 OF 2017 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the 2nd respondent to conduct investigation of Crime No. 121/2015 dated 30.08.2015 forthwith in the interest of justice Counsel for the Petitioner:
1. KAMBHAMPATI RAMESH BABU Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1. GP FOR HOME (AP) The Court made the following: THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE BATTU DEVANAND
WRIT PETITION NO.7894 OF 2017
ORDER:
Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that in view of the subsequent developments happened during pendency of this Writ Petition, nothing survives in this Writ Petition for further adjudication and sought to dismiss the Writ Petition as infructuous.
Operative part
Considering the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner, the Writ Petition is dismissed as infructuous.
There shall be no order as to costs. Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, in this case shall stand closed. Dated: 23.04.2026 TM __________________________ JUSTICE BATTU DEVANAND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE BATTU DEVANAND WRIT PETITION NO: 7894 of 2017 Dated: 23.04.2026 TM
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: petitioner, the Writ Petition is dismissed as infructuous
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Constitution of India — art. 226; Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 — s. 151.
Which court decided this case, and when?
Andhra Pradesh High Court, on 30 Aug 2015. The bench was BATTU DEVANAND.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.